Free Speech Showdown Scheduled For Today (Update: New Post)
[Guest post by Aaron Worthing; if you have tips, please send them here. Or by Twitter @AaronWorthing.]
Update: See this post for updates to the story.
Terry Jones, famous for having a Koran burned, has decided to go to Dearborn, Michigan, to do some sort of protest outside a mosque, today at 5 p.m. He has also stated that he has “no plans” to burn a Koran (but you do have to wonder if he might do some spontaneous combustion). So he sought a permit from the city, and the city is refusing to give it to him. From the reports it appears that the sticking point is this:
Prosecutors have sought the unspecified bond — Jones said it was up to $100,000 — for extra police in fear of a riot.
As Eugene Volokh has pointed out, this is almost certainly unconstitutional under Forsyth v. Nationalist Movement, where a city ordinance charging up to $1,000 for permits depending on costs was struck down. There were two basic concerns in that case. The first is the lack of standards in that law allowing for a great deal of discretion by county administrators in choosing the fee. Since I haven’t read the ordinance in question in Jones’ case, I will punt on whether that is an issue, except to quote this key passage on that subject, so you know what the law says:
Respondent contends that the county ordinance is facially invalid because it does not prescribe adequate standards for the administrator to apply when he sets a permit fee. A government regulation that allows arbitrary application is “inherently inconsistent with a valid time, place, and manner regulation because such discretion has the potential for becoming a means of suppressing a particular point of view.”… To curtail that risk, “a law subjecting the exercise of First Amendment freedoms to the prior restraint of a license” must contain “narrow, objective, and definite standards to guide the licensing authority.”… The reasoning is simple: If the permit scheme “involves appraisal of facts, the exercise of judgment, and the formation of an opinion,” … by the licensing authority, “the danger of censorship and of abridgment of our precious First Amendment freedoms is too great” to be permitted[.]
But more fundamentally if the ordinance allows the fee to vary according to how controversial the speech is, that is flat-out unconstitutional, which appears to be what is going on, here. This is what the Supreme Court said to that:
The costs to which petitioner refers are those associated with the public’s reaction to the speech. Listeners’ reaction to speech is not a content-neutral basis for regulation. … Speech cannot be financially burdened, any more than it can be punished or banned, simply because it might offend a hostile mob…. This Court has held time and again: “Regulations which permit the Government to discriminate on the basis of the content of the message cannot be tolerated under the First Amendment.” The county offers only one justification for this ordinance: raising revenue for police services. While this undoubtedly is an important government responsibility, it does not justify a content-based permit fee.
It is often joked during all of this that Christians should commit acts of terror and generalized violence when their faith is blasphemed, in order to receive the respect accorded to Islam these days. This dark joke represents two criticisms. First, it is criticizing the fact that many of the same people who felt that not only should the Piss Christ be allowed to be made, but it should actually be funded by taxpayer dollars (which I always considered a violation of the Establishment Clause), now are advocating things like anti-blasphemy laws. Second, it is criticizing the terrible incentives those hypocrites are creating by rewarding bad behavior with the censorship those terrorists and rioters keenly desire. In rejecting this “cost of police protection” approach to permit fees the Supreme Court has prevented cities from creating that perverse incentive to get violent when one is offended.
And incidentally, that dark joke has started to take on some reality (which naturally I oppose, too).
So Jones challenged the claim in court and the judge sided with the city, but the final determination will be made by a jury:
With some of metro Detroit’s biggest political and religious leaders united behind Muslims in Dearborn, Florida Pastor Terry Jones is expected to appear in court this morning for a jury trial that will determine whether he can hold a rally at the largest mosque in the city.
This “bigot does not represent” us, Imam Hassan Qazwini, head of the Islamic Center of America in Dearborn, declared to a crowd of about 700 metro Detroiters at a rally that drew U.S. Rep. John Dingell, a Dearborn Democrat, and the local heads of the Catholic and Episcopal churches.
Qazwini’s mosque is where Jones wants to rally today against what he calls “the radical element in Islam.”
Jones appeared in court Thursday and refused to post a bond for the massive security effort Dearborn says it would have to deploy if Jones were allowed to rally. The judge then ordered the trial.
As Jones addressed reporters during a chaotic day, Dearborn residents shouted at him.
“Shame on you!” yelled Leyla Abdul-Ghani, 40, who is Muslim. “We are decent, hardworking people.”
Questions remained as to whether the pastor would be able to carry out his plan.
Dearborn officials and Wayne County prosecutors sought to convince Jones to post a bond for security costs if he wants to protest in Dearborn. And they urged him to rally not at the Islamic Center of America — his desired spot — but instead in front of their City Hall or civic center.
Dearborn District Judge Mark Somers sided with government officials, finding their arguments compelling. The officials argued that for logistical and security reasons, Jones should not be allowed to rally at the Islamic center.
Jones declined to post the bond, prompting the judge to order a jury trial for 8:30 a.m. that will decide whether Jones can hold his rally this evening.
Incidentally, the ACLU has done the right thing by taking Jones’ side:
Earlier today, the American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan and others criticized authorities, saying they had overstepped and were wrongly denying Jones his constitutional rights.
The government should “not impinge on a person’s right to protest, even when their speech is as distasteful and offensive as Rev. Jones’ is,” said Rana Elmir, communications director for the Michigan ACLU. “We should combat hate speech with more speech. I disagree vehemently with Rev. Jones’ message, but I believe wholeheartedly in his right to express himself.”
And here’s a little more on the city attempting to justify it:
Dearborn Police Chief Ron Haddad said there are serious problems with having Jones protest outside the Islamic Center of America, noting that Jones has received numerous death threats and has a $1.2-million bounty on his head from a Pakistan-based terrorist group.
Moreover, the mosque is surrounded by several churches that have Good Friday services, making traffic an issue, he argued. The site also is logistically a challenge because of its layout, he said.
The city already had denied Jones a permit to protest.
“It would have been chaos,” Dearborn Mayor Jack O’Reilly Jr. told the Free Press on Thursday. “We just couldn’t do that.”…
O’Reilly, an attorney, said the government has to make “reasonable accommodation” for free-speech rights, which he says the city routinely does by providing free-speech zones in front of Dearborn City Hall and the civic center.
Hey, Mayor O’Reilly, in case you were asleep in Constitutional law class, this is the correct “free speech zone:”
Frickin idiot.
Indeed, Mayor O’Reilly wrote an open letter (read: obvious posturing) to Jones saying things like this:
First of all, Dearborn supports the Constitution as well as any city in America. Our commitment to the Constitution is unwavering, not merely convenient, which makes your hyperbole about Sharia Law being practiced in the courts or civil law of Dearborn nonsensical. So, you are coming to protest against an imaginary threat that doesn’t exist in our community. Not in our courts, not at our City Hall, not on our streets and not in any of our places of worship.
Still, because we do understand the Constitution here, we are not preventing you from expressing your free speech. In fact, in Dearborn, we’ve even gone one step farther than most communities in support of free speech. We established, by ordinance,“Permit Free Zones” intended for demonstrations and free speech.
Right, so his belief is that the Constitution is unwavering, and not merely a matter of convenience. But you should only practice your constitutional right to free speech in a zone that is convenient to him. Glad he cleared that up.
Jones, meanwhile, has pretty much said that regardless of whether he gets the permit, he plans to go forward:
Jones isn’t likely to relent. He’s said for weeks that he plans to demonstrate outside the Ford Road mosque with or without a permit. Earlier today, Jones said the mosque is the ideal site for his protest against “radical Islam” and Sharia, or Islamic, law.
“There is no place better than there to present this message,” said Jones, the pastor of the Dove World Outreach center in Gainesville, Fla.
Jones said he is planning to bring a pistol to protect himself in case of violence, but has no plans to burn an Islamic holy book.
“We are coming there totally in peace,” said Jones, who said he will be joined by several other people including a rabbi.
And he elaborated more about the gun thing:
“We have made it very clear that we are coming there with very, very peaceful intentions,” Jones told the television station. “We will be armed. We do have concealed weapons permits.”
Um, you have concealed carry permits… in Michigan? Because I could be wrong, but I don’t believe that a Florida permit will travel.
And, by the way, he was not kidding about that:
Police were called Thursday night after Koran-burning pastor Terry Jones accidentally discharged his firearm in the parking lot of a television station, where he had just conducted an interview, MyFoxDetroit.com reported.
“Pastor Terry Jones just discharged his firearm in our parking lot,” myFOXdetroit.com announced on its Facebook page.
“He claims it was fired by accident. The shot went into the floorboard of his car. No one was hurt. Police on scene.”
Southfield Police confirmed the gun accidentally discharged. No charges were filed, and police gave the gun back to Jones before sending him on his way.
The FOX-owned WJBK television station where the incident took place has a policy of not allowing guns inside the building.
And while that is worth a good chuckle, it’s really hard to blame him for carrying a gun given the million dollar bounty on his head. We might rightfully criticize his gun safety skills, but not his righteous desire to be able to defend himself. And I guess the fact that the cops gave him his gun back suggests he had a lawful right to carry it (sweeping aside constitutional concerns that might be present in this situation in light of recent Second Amendment cases).
Whether you like this guy’s message or not, on the narrow issue of his First Amendment right to protest, he is absolutely in the right. And if you happen to dislike his message you should be doing a facepalm right now, because Dearborn is giving him legitimacy.
Ironically one of the people who hate him the most gets that:
Majed Moughni, a Dearborn attorney, agreed that Jones has the right to protest. Moughni is not a fan of Jones, having burned him in effigy last year because he had threatened to burn the Quran.
But Moughni said it’s wrong for the city and county to try to hinder Jones’ rights. “Instead of him being the bad guy, now he’s the hero,” Moughni said. “They’ve turned him into a hero of the First Amendment.
“The prosecutors should withdraw their demands and let him speak as he wishes, which is his right under the Constitution.”
(Emphasis added.)
Indeed, here’s the truly boneheaded element of all of this. From what I gather, Pastor Jones is condemning the Koran because he feels it is an evil book that leads to violence. Meanwhile, the entire foundation of this attempt to limit his speech is based on… the fear that Muslims will resort to violence in the name of their faith. Which if true kind of tends to prove Jones right, doesn’t it?
So, if I was a Muslim leader living there I would pursue a two pronged approach. First, I would petition the mayor to let him protest for free, or after paying a mild, content-neutral fee. I might even offer to pay that fee (subject to my financial limitations). And I would make it very clear to city officials that I take great offense at the notion that Muslims are incapable of self-control. Second, then I would organize a very quiet, dignified, peaceful counter protest. I would be determined to prove Jones wrong.
Indeed, what I said to Liaquat Ali Khan the other day still applies:
If there is ever a day when I am convinced that Muslims as a group are incapable of responding peacefully to offense, including the burning of their holy book, that is the day I decide that Islam is a threat to America. And on that day I will start advocating things like an exclusion of all Muslims from this country.
Consider it the “anti-trust” theory of freedom of religion. You are free to believe in any religion… that will respect my freedom of religion. But if you can’t reconcile your faith to my practice of freedom of religion, then it is your freedom that will be restricted, not mine.
As it stands now, the reaction so far has supported Jones’ thesis. But naturally I will need more evidence than I am likely to see this afternoon.
[Posted and authored by Aaron Worthing.]
The Dearborn mayor’s letter was incredibly idiotic, and displays his constitutional and religious ignorance…
aunursa (a2a019) — 4/22/2011 @ 8:28 amaunursa
there is so much wrong with that letter, its really hard to capture all the stupidity.
Aaron Worthing (e7d72e) — 4/22/2011 @ 8:29 amI recently had a business trip to Detroit and stayed in Dearborn.
Cool place and very nice people. I’d move there given the opportunity.
It was very refreshing being somewhat isolated from the conservative redneck bigots so prevalent around the midwest.
The Middle Easterners in Dearborn and those who worked at the hotel were kind, polite, and considerate. And well educated. The antithesis of the American teabagger.
jharp (f8a6a3) — 4/22/2011 @ 8:30 amAh yes burn a koran and you get blamed for the predictable rioting to ensue. dunk a crucifix in urine and it is the fault of the rioters for maiming or disfiguring anyone in response to your garbage.
DohBiden (15aa57) — 4/22/2011 @ 8:35 amLast first: Sure, you would do those things, but depending on your point of view, that’s either because you aren’t a Muslim, and therefore don’t think that violence is the answer, or because you aren’t a muslim, and therefore don’t have the righteous anger and humilation brought upon you that must be answered with firm resolve.
BTW, I’m not a fan of allowing people to protest in front of religious buildings on religious holidays. I wouldn’t like it if a thousand atheists showed up and chanted during our Easter sunrise service, making it impossible for us to enjoy our faith.
This quote from the police is the scariest “justification” for not allowing the protest: “Dearborn Police Chief Ron Haddad said there are serious problems with having Jones protest outside the Islamic Center of America, noting that Jones has received numerous death threats and has a $1.2-million bounty on his head from a Pakistan-based terrorist group.”
The logical extension of that is that because he is threatened with an illegal act of murder, it isn’t safe to allow him in the city. It reminds me of the old western movies where the people would kindly ask some lawman to leave their town, lest the bad guys raze their town for allowing the lawman to stay.
If we get to where the probability of violence is the arbiter for free speech, we will be in serious trouble. Weren’t a lot of the early civil rights protests prone to violence?
Lastly, isn’t Dearborn where they arrested people for handing out religious pamphlets on a public street to people leaving a Muslim event? If so, doesn’t that kind of make a mockery of the Mayor’s claim that they understand the constitution?
Charles (5cddf4) — 4/22/2011 @ 8:36 amthere is so much wrong with that letter
Comment by Aaron Worthing — 4/22/2011 @ 8:29 am
I don’t know what you find “so much wrong” but I find this sentence so much right.
“Your free speech rights do not allow you to trespass on the private property of others or prevent them from the Constitutional right to freely practice their religion.”
jharp (f8a6a3) — 4/22/2011 @ 8:37 am“…this is the correct free speech zone.”
Excellent. Thanks for that.
By the way, good to be back (2 days early).
Gesundheit (d7ea47) — 4/22/2011 @ 8:42 ami’ma be on the white trash preacher guy’s side
happyfeet (760ba3) — 4/22/2011 @ 8:45 amSo…let’s see if I can understand…
This “jharp” person defends a group against bigotry by being a bigot?
I realize that he is a just a troll, but what does he bring, exactly? Eleventy! truth?
Simon Jester (c8876d) — 4/22/2011 @ 8:50 am“or prevent them from the Constitutional right to freely practice their religion.”
Jones has given no indication that he plans or intends to disrupt either a Muslim service or the Christian Good Friday services. The protest in and of itself does not constitute interference with the rights of the Muslims or the other Christians.
aunursa (a2a019) — 4/22/2011 @ 9:01 amSimon Jester,
What in the hell are you talking about?
I do not support bigots nor bigotry.
I support those that oppose bigotry. Democrats.
jharp (f8a6a3) — 4/22/2011 @ 9:03 amJharpy hates freedom of expression, and freedom of speech.
How do my balls taste, jharpy?
The citizens of Indiana would be happy if you moved your ignorant hate-filled vile arse to Dearborn.
JD (a8f2ae) — 4/22/2011 @ 9:04 amThe protest in and of itself does not constitute interference with the rights of the Muslims or the other Christians.
Comment by aunursa — 4/22/2011 @ 9:01 am
You are amazing. You can see into the future that the protest will not constitute interference with anyones rights?
Wow. Could you let me know who is going to win the Celtics Knicks game tonight and by how many.
Thanks in advance.
jharp (f8a6a3) — 4/22/2011 @ 9:06 amUnless your a islamocommie interrupting people because your angry that is a right.
DohBiden (15aa57) — 4/22/2011 @ 9:06 amHow do my balls taste, jharpy?
Comment by JD — 4/22/2011 @ 9:04 am
Always comes to some sort of homosexual act with you conservatives. Always.
Hmmmm. I wonder why that is.
Why don’t you stop the denials and go give it a try? It is obvious that you are obsessing over it.
jharp (f8a6a3) — 4/22/2011 @ 9:09 amSkokie!!!
elissa (c74994) — 4/22/2011 @ 9:16 ambut you do have to wonder if he might do some spontaneous combustion
I don’t care who y’are, that’s funny ri’there.
Mitch (890cbf) — 4/22/2011 @ 9:17 amCharles
good point about the suppression of expression in dearborn in the past. i will probably do an update mentioning that.
Aaron Worthing (e7d72e) — 4/22/2011 @ 9:18 amjharp would be very happy with his fellow totalitarians in Dearborn. Damn is he dumb.
jharp – What is Islam’s policy on abortion and homosexuality? Damn are you dumb.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 4/22/2011 @ 9:22 amIslam opposes abortion not because they are pro-life they believe suicide bombing is a better way to kill yourself.
DohBiden (15aa57) — 4/22/2011 @ 9:26 amThe Christians sued and lost.
aunursa (a2a019) — 4/22/2011 @ 9:27 amhttp://michiganmessenger.com/38702/christian-ministry-loses-suit-over-leafleting-at-dearborn-muslim-festival
Jharpy revels in his ignorance and hatred. He bathes in it. Celebrates it.
JD (a8f2ae) — 4/22/2011 @ 9:27 amAnother lawsuit was filed earlier this year.
aunursa (a2a019) — 4/22/2011 @ 9:29 amhttp://www.examiner.com/conservative-in-yakima/thomas-more-law-center-files-suit-regarding-police-actions-dearborn-michigan
jharp – What is Islam’s policy on abortion and homosexuality? Damn are you dumb.
Comment by daleyrocks — 4/22/2011 @ 9:22 am
I have no idea and could not care less. Please share with me the last piece of legislation introduced by Muslims trying to force their religious beliefs onto me.
You have Muslims and Christians confused. It is the Christians who try to legislate their religious beliefs.
jharp (f8a6a3) — 4/22/2011 @ 9:29 amThe implication here is that the Muslims might go all splodey-violent. Might, hell. The city’s opposition is based on sureashell. Me, I don’t know if they’re right or not. But they’re in Dearborn and I haven’t been there in decades. I defer to them.
Richard Aubrey (cafc94) — 4/22/2011 @ 10:04 amI agree with about 98% of what Aaron wrote. The remaining differences are over style or uncompleted comments. It would not be difficult to get the answer as to whether a FL CCW permit is valid in MI, for example.
I do think the “trust in God but carry a piece” mentality expressed by Jones is problematic. I think that the city of Dearborn is right to be concerned over the potential for violence. Doing nothing is not the answer, but stationing enough officers to control the area is not affordable. I don’t think that charging the mosque for protection is either legal or right, but I would encourage them to (if legal) hire off-duty police as security. The mosque (and its parishioners) have done nothing illegal, nor even outrageous (other than daring to exist, which is both a moral and a legal right in the USA).
The issue of the “free-speech area” is a bit of a red herring, in that these have been found to be constitutional, as they are usually a matter of public safety. Every major political event has them, as do things like the Olympic Games, and the major religious convocations. There are limits on things such as minimum size and physical relationship to the event being targeted, so that the demonstrators can assemble and are in the general area of the event.
I agree that the “rules” for charging the bond are too abstract, and arguably too subjective and subject to abuse for social or political ends. As expressed, I think those will be found to be not constitutionally valid.
GH in Utah (5cad89) — 4/22/2011 @ 10:49 amYes, however, those who would be violent, or threaten violence ought to pay for the security. and maybe they are judgment proof, but they aren’t community service proof. There’s the solution. If an organization makes a threat, fine them $100,000. If someone actually shows up violently, give them 4 years of 20 hour per week community service picking up garbage or working the raw sewage tanks at the water treatment plant.
Dustin (c16eca) — 4/22/2011 @ 10:54 am“O’Reilly, an attorney, said the government has to make “reasonable accommodation” for free-speech rights, which he says the city routinely does by providing free-speech zones in front of Dearborn City Hall and the civic center.”
Great idea. A place where loons of all races, colors and creeds can go and do looney free speech stuff, like burn Korans, or American flags, for example.
They ought to have a government officil on hand too, just in case someone wants to assemble peacefully to petition for a redress of grievances.
Dave Surls (b7b4a0) — 4/22/2011 @ 11:07 am“And on that day I will start advocating things like an exclusion of all Muslims from this country…”
Also a good idea. Muslims bring a whole of negatives to the plate, and darn near no positives.
If it was up me, folks who are Nazi or Communist party members, or members of the Muslim religion would be barred from entering and residing in the United States. Same for Aztecs wanting to come here, due to their penchant for practicing human sacrifice (assuming there are any left). They all cause all kinds of problems, thanks to their colorful ideologies, and they lack the charm to make up for the trouble they cause.
We have enough loons in this country, we don’t need to import any more. As a matter of fact, we have enough people in this country, and we don’t really need to import any more.
Besides, there’s the old slippery slope argument. If we start letting Muslims in today, the next thing you know we’ll be letting in leftist Eurotrash, and there goes the old neighborhood. Just ask yourself how much you would like having America-hating Eurotrash, like George Galloway, for a next door neighbor.
Dave Surls (b7b4a0) — 4/22/2011 @ 11:20 amIf the intent of the speech is to forment violence then – its not considered free speech
Thus no permit
EricPWJohnson (6f6302) — 4/22/2011 @ 11:23 amI would not want to trust this government with that kind of power. Just being a Tea Partier, and I guess a member of a few other demographics that DHS sometimes claims are impure. No, let the commies and nazis and idiots say their dumbass crap. It’s good to stay fresh on the arguments against them.
Dustin (c16eca) — 4/22/2011 @ 11:31 amI am pretty sure I would never allow epwj to determine who was allowed to exercise their right to freedom of speech. Though, I would let him before that pig ignert stupid bigot jharpy.
JD (6e25b4) — 4/22/2011 @ 11:42 amJD
You dont have a right to free speech – it is quite regulated
Which isnt a bad thing in certain situations
EricPWJohnson (6f6302) — 4/22/2011 @ 11:44 amFL CCW permit is not recognized in MI. However, the PA permit is and you can get a PA non-resident permit if you have a FL resident permit. I would bet he has done this if he is publically saying he will be carrying a weapon. Otherwise the police would just detain, search and arrest him. He has given them all the justificaiton they need by saying he will be carrying.
Cecil (7e2b2f) — 4/22/2011 @ 11:47 am“I would not want to trust this government with that kind of power.”
They already have that power. Hence, the existence of the old INS, and the new agencies that replaced it after we created the Department of Homeland Security.
Might as well use them, since we already have these agencies in place. We already have enough problems in this country, we don’t need to bring in more. And, Muslims cause all kinds of problems. Every place on earth where Muslims are in contact with people that don’t share their ideology, there’s nothing but trouble…Russia, the Balkans, Africa, Israel, India…it’s always the same story.
And, what positives do Muslims bring to the table to counterbalances all the trouble they cause? Basically none. Just take a look at any Muslim dominated country…every single one of them is a total craphole. Think that’s a coincidence? It ain’t.
Same thing for commies. Many negatves, no positives, they destroy every place they rule… so keep them the hell out of America.
Dave Surls (b7b4a0) — 4/22/2011 @ 11:56 americ
that is not the law.
Aaron Worthing (e7d72e) — 4/22/2011 @ 11:58 amJD
Its sad you have to get a permit – when I was in DC the police were out in force because a group was going to reap the speech on the Lincoln Memorial and thats also considered an act that needs a permit
In the cases we denied permits were in cases where the Klan, skin heads, latin kings et al wanted to drum up resentment in the Federal Housing Projects and needed police protection so they weren’t torn limb from limb
no way, I was putting officers in this mess, sue me
Not because a politician or a street preacher wanted his or her say – those were allowed but we charged them – why they go into the projects – dont ask me – most didnt vote, most didnt even live there, just thats where the best drugs and hoochies were
go figure
EricPWJohnson (6f6302) — 4/22/2011 @ 12:00 pmWrong Aaron, totally wrong
Permits are always denied – quote all the cases you want, no way is any city going to allow a riot to commence
Ask the city of Houston which on MLK day only awards 1 permit and several groups apply
incitment to violence is the key factor in legally denying permits
EricPWJohnson (6f6302) — 4/22/2011 @ 12:02 pmread the speech not reap the speech – geez..
EricPWJohnson (6f6302) — 4/22/2011 @ 12:03 pmjharp math:
Icy Texan (82fcef) — 4/22/2011 @ 12:06 pm“I do not support bigots nor bigotry” +
“Always comes to some sort of homosexual act with you conservatives. Always” /
“You have Muslims and Christians confused. It is the Christians who try to legislate their religious beliefs” x
“It was very refreshing being somewhat isolated from the conservative redneck bigots so prevalent around the midwest” = e11eventy!!!
“24.jharp – What is Islam’s policy on abortion and homosexuality? Damn are you dumb.
Comment by daleyrocks — 4/22/2011 @ 9:22 am
I have no idea and could not care less.”
jharp – As I said before, damn are you dumb. Nice try at deflection, but damn are you dumb.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 4/22/2011 @ 12:07 pmmuslims bring lots of positives! lots of them are very nice people for example my eye doctor before she moved away and my friend M and the guy what told me about the tasty loganberries – they’re very tasty they’re a lot like raspberries
happyfeet (a55ba0) — 4/22/2011 @ 12:09 pmeric
if they do that, its against the rules. bradenburg v. ohio.
Aaron Worthing (e7d72e) — 4/22/2011 @ 12:16 pmEric
and seriously, you believe the muslims can’t control themselves?
is that your final answer?
Aaron Worthing (e7d72e) — 4/22/2011 @ 12:16 pmYeah, Dearborn’s got all the charm and natural beauty of downtown Beirut.
I wouldn’t live in Dearborn if you gave me a fortified compound and paid for a private army.
Scott Jacobs (d027b8) — 4/22/2011 @ 12:26 pmRemember, Aaron, that Eric lives part-time in “Arabia”; therefore, he knows whereof he speaks.
Icy Texan (82fcef) — 4/22/2011 @ 12:33 pm“Cool place and very nice people. I’d move there given the opportunity.”
Scott – jharp doesn’t like living surrounded by rednecks in Indiana but would love living in Dearborn surrounded by people who except for the belief in the totalitarian control of the lives of others, share no common beliefs with him. Damn is he dumb.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 4/22/2011 @ 12:34 pm#
jharp – What is Islam’s policy on abortion and homosexuality? Damn are you dumb.
Comment by daleyrocks — 4/22/2011 @ 9:22 am
I have no idea and could not care less. Please share with me the last piece of legislation introduced by Muslims trying to force their religious beliefs onto me.
You have Muslims and Christians confused. It is the Christians who try to legislate their religious beliefs.
Comment by jharp — 4/22/2011 @ 9:29 am
How about it daleyrocks?
Please share with me the last piece of legislation introduced by Muslims trying to force their religious beliefs onto me.
You’ve got nothing. Jackass.
jharp (f8a6a3) — 4/22/2011 @ 12:36 pm“would love living in Dearborn surrounded by people who except for the belief in the totalitarian control of the lives of others, share no common beliefs with him”
Comment by daleyrocks — 4/22/2011 @ 12:34 pm
Not only do you have no idea what my beliefs are but you know nothing of the Middle Easterners in Dearborn beliefs either.
You know nothing. You have no idea what you are talking about.
How much time have you spent in the area?
jharp (f8a6a3) — 4/22/2011 @ 12:39 pmHe derides conservatives as prissy homos but yets calls us bigots.
Get off ya high horse you cretin 🙄
DohBiden (15aa57) — 4/22/2011 @ 12:48 pm“I recently had a business trip to Detroit…”–Harpo
Sucks when you have to drive all the way into the city just to cash your welfare check.
Dave Surls (27bbf7) — 4/22/2011 @ 12:51 pmI do not know why he directed that gibberish to me. It has about as much to do with my response as mayonnaise does to go-cart racing. Who knew the Latin Kings sought permits to protest, and that fearless epwj stood in the way of their 1st Amendment rights? IMP Deux.
As AW correctly notes, it is ridiculous to think that the only response a Muslim could conjure up would be violence. Soft bigotry of low expectations, on steroids.
JD (d56362) — 4/22/2011 @ 12:54 pmJD
I didnt stand in the way the city did and as an employee of the city there ya go.
Dont ask me why people do stupid things – the fact that you need a permit – should be all the proof you need that free speech isnt free
never was
Aaron
Thats a stupid question – the act is extremely offensive and is meant totally to start violence
Its the city that has a responsibility for the safety of its citizens
Anyone who thinks otherwise is just fooling themselves
EricPWJohnson (dc4839) — 4/22/2011 @ 8:32 pmYou said we, including you in that group. Fabulist.
Goodnight.
JD (318f81) — 4/22/2011 @ 8:45 pmIf Chaplinsky, didn’t apply to the Phelps, who I swear are like Jones’ bobbsey twins of inanity, it won’t apply here.
narciso (79ddc3) — 4/22/2011 @ 8:47 pmEPWJ,
How do you reconcile allowing Klan and Neo-Nazi demonstrations being protected speech with prohibiting speech against islamic radicals? The only difference I see is that people who would counter-protest the Klan and Neo-Nazi marches don’t kill their targets. Yet, the Klan and others not only get to air their views, they usually get police protection that is rarely (if ever) needed.
You’ve never demonstrated the slightest understanding of free speech despite enjoying the benefits here by your constant lies and misrepresentations. You’re a cake-eater of the worst sort. Double-standards like yours should be painful and I’m willing to bet that your life has plenty of pain in it because you just can’t help yourself.
Terry Jones did not plan violence, nor did he incite violence. What he planned was a peaceful, if distasteful, comment on what has been happening in the name of religion. Muslims in and around Dearborn have no more right to react with violence than someone who objects to my preferring Coke over Pepsi. They are responsible for their own behavior, not Jones.
Stashiu3 (44da70) — 4/22/2011 @ 9:01 pmYou know, Jharp, you made a lot of bigoted generalizations about my race and religion for someone who claims to know so little common knowledge. The Hanbali school of Islam holds that homosexual conduct must incur the death penalty. And indeed, a lot of gays are murdered by Islamic regimes.
How can you possibly not know that? You must be amazingly incurious. Is that why you pretend conservatives are too horrible to have a reasonable discussion with? Forced incuriousity?
This is particularly amazing given the topic of the thread, which is basically blasphemy prohibition.
Dearborn has a record of enforcing religion. For example, if you preach Christianity to Muslims, you could be arrested. Just pretend, for a second, that this happened in Oklahoma City, and they arrested Muslims for preaching to Christians. Oh, wait, you can’t handle that much work.
So just take my word for it: you’re wrong and owe Daleyrocks an apology.
EPWJ, what about this man’s conduct incites violence? I haven’t heard anything about his plans that do that. Would you say an abortion support protest, or a gay rights parade, can be fined and punished and even shut down, if it’s making someone angry enough to commit violence?
DohBiden (c16eca) — 4/22/2011 @ 9:11 pmCan EPWJ please explain to me how Fred Phelps has gotten away with his protests? In fact, any time someone prevents him from protesting, Fred Phelps wins legal fees for civil rights violations.
Stashiu is right.
DohBiden (c16eca) — 4/22/2011 @ 9:13 pmjharp believes I need to show him something. Damn is he dumb. Wrong. All I needed to do is point out the contradictions and hypocrisy in his statements. I did. Damn is he dumb.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 4/22/2011 @ 9:21 pmI bet the guy what was gonna make a killing selling tasty churros to the protesters is pretty disappointed
happyfeet (760ba3) — 4/22/2011 @ 9:24 pmAll religions are equal, some are just more equal.
Was Orwell the greatest and most accurate prognosticator or what?
Jukin (b80229) — 4/23/2011 @ 3:12 pmFascism and marxism are two sides of the same coin.
Yes they might be in opposition to each other but i’am still right.
DohBiden (15aa57) — 4/25/2011 @ 7:54 amA Florida CCW has reciprocity with Michigan, I believe.
http://licgweb.doacs.state.fl.us/news/concealed_carry.html
Gun Nut (34b9f5) — 4/25/2011 @ 2:27 pm